One Step Done And Another Begun, In I Wonder How Many Miles (Robert Hunter & Jerry Garcia - "New Speedway Boogie"

           A few days ago I conducted a funeral. While meeting with the family prior to the Levayah (funeral), I was asked if I believed that people can change. Certainly, Judaism is pretty clear about the possibility of change. Because Judaism is behaviorally based and not dogmatically based, we believe that if the behavior changes, then ultimately the individual will change. Among the most prevalent themes of the Yamim Noraim (High Holidays) is the notion that we are capable of changing our behavior, changing ourselves, improving ourselves, and becoming better versions of ourselves. Certainly, I want to believe that, and as a Rabbi that is my first response. However, I don’t think it is so simple. Changing a personality, changing who we are, changing our core seems a rather daunting task. Several years ago, a book by Stephen Guise entitled Mini Habits: Smaller Habits Bigger Result appeared. Guise’s theory, based upon Lao Tzu’s famous pearl of wisdom “The journey of a thousand miles begins with a small step”, begins with the brutally realistic view of human nature. Guise explains that change is predicated upon two ingredients: intention and over-estimating competence. Big intentions and big ambitions are worthless if they don’t bring results. The lack of intended result harms and defeats the person and then he/she will eventually stop the process. The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias that people generally overestimate their competencies. For Guise, this means that “self-control” ought to be considered as “competency” and, in general, we think we have much more self-control than we really do. This unrealistic evaluation of our self-control also contributes to our inability to change.

          This week we read from Parsha Vayishlach. We read about Yaakov and Esav’s reunion, Yaakov’s wrestling match, and his name change the night before the reunion. We read about Yaakov’s daughter Dina and her unholy tryst with Shechem a member of the Hivvites. We learn of what many consider to be the fanatical response on behalf of her brother Shimon and Levi. Yaakov returns to Bet El, the place where he dreamt of the ladder many years before, builds an altar, and receives the covenant from God. During that process, God changes his name from Yaakov to Yisroel, even though his name was changed prior to the reunion. Rachel dies as well as a wet nurse named Deborah. Finally, we read a list of Yaakov’s children as well as Esav’s. 

          Yaakov’s trepidation prior to his reunion with his brother stems from the one unanswered question. Has Esav really changed? Yaakov just crossed the Yabok River and is unsure as to what to expect from his brother Esav.  VaYaratz Esav Likrato VaiChabkeihu, VaYipol Al Tzavarav Vayishahkeihu Vayivku – Esav ran toward him, embraced him, fell upon his neck, and kissed him; then they wept (Gen. 33:4). Certainly, at first blush, Esav appears to have forgiven his brother. Certainly, it appears that the decades have washed away Esav’s animosity towards his brother.  It appears that Esav has changed. The plain meaning of the text suggests this. However, in the plain text, the simple meaning is focused upon behavior, upon the margins, and not at the core. Imagine not seeing someone for thirty years for fear of your life. Then as you approach; the person runs towards you. Are they a friend or foe? When you embrace, would it be out of the question to wonder if this hug felt more like an assault instead of a loving embrace? What happens when the person falls upon your neck and kisses you on the neck? Is this a kiss of brotherly love or the proverbial “kiss of death”?  All these questions were cause for Yaakov’s trepidation. One thing is clear, however, the narrative concludes with Esav expressing a desire to escort Yaakov and his family to their destination. When Yaakov politely rebuffs Esav’s offer; Esav suggests that some of his armed men should escort Yaakov and his family. Again, wary of his brother, Yaakov politely responds Lamah Zeh Why this (suggestion), Emtzah Chein B’Einei Adoni Let me just have favor in my Lord’s eyes. VaYashav BaYom HaHu Eisav L’Darko Seirah So Esav started back that day on his way toward Seir. V’Yaakov Nasah Sukkotah - but Yaakov traveled to Sukkot (Gen. 33:15-17). The brothers go their separate ways. They don’t hug and kiss each other goodbye, or at least the Torah text doesn’t tell us that they hugged and kissed each other goodbye. Rather there is an offer by Esav to take Yaakov to Seir. Maybe Esav was attempting to be nice,  or perhaps he was trying to lull Yaakov into a trap and planned to wipe out Yaakov and his family later.  Yaakov understood that while his brother’s outward behavior may have changed, it was more realistic to assume that at Esav’s core, big brother Esav hadn’t changed at all. For the sake of the future safety of his family, Yaakov was best served by staying as far away as possible from his brother. 

            Yes, at first blush it was so easy for Yaakov and Esav to hug and kiss each other, to weep together.  Over the course of twenty years, maybe each had marginally softened, perhaps they had become better versions, more honest versions of themselves. However, at their respective cores, Yaakov, ever the spiritual clinger now grasps firmly to Hashem. This is worthy of a new name or an additional name: Israel.  Esav, ever the hunter, would wait for his prey to grow careless then go in for the kill. There is nothing in the text to suggest that Esav is capable of introspection. He hunts. His viewpoint is always external,  focused upon his prey. At the core, he is who is. So do people change? It seems that change is only possible if they are brutally honest and are inclined to embrace the effort required to engage in mini habits with an eye towards big results.

Peace,
Rav Yitz

It Will Require A Change That Hasn't Come Before (Robert Hunter, Jerrry Garcia,& Phil Lesh "St. Stephen")

I realize that we have just completed the first week of July. What does an American do on July 4^th while living in Toronto? I went to work. However I still managed to listen to a baseball game, and watch the fireworks later that evening. During the broadcast of the game, the announcers were already commenting upon the team’s success and whether they will be active at the end of July when Major League Baseball’s trade deadline occurs. The announcer commented upon whether certain players could use a change of scenery in order for them to improve their performance. For the ownership, some players have failed to reach expectations and they assume that a change of scenery will not only help the player but by trading that player, the ownership might get someone who can help the team.

This Shabbat is we read Parsha Balak. In the Parsha we read an interesting narrative that is filled with suspense, humor, intrigue, an apparent “midseason trade” and even a happy ending. It is interesting to note that throughout the Parsha, the focus is upon the outside world as it relates to the Bnai Yisroel. That is to say, Balak, the king of Moav and the tribe of Midian are the subjects of the Parsha. Bnai Yisroel hovers as the main reason for why the narrative is pertinent; however for once, Bnai Yisroel is not doing something wrong, they are not recipients of God’s anger. Instead they placidly and temporarily settled on the plains of Moav waiting to enter into Eretz Canaan. Not until the end of the Parsha and only after the narrative of Balak and Bilaam concluded, does the Torah return to a narrative style with Bnai Yisroel as the subject of poor behavior and God’s anger.

 Bilaam, a soothsayer is hired by Balak to curse Bnai Yisroel. By cursing Bnai Yisroel, Balak believed that this was the only way to defeat Bnai Yisroel since they had successfully waged war on all the indigenous tribes thus far. The donkey that Bilaam rides upon on his way to cursing Bnai Yisroel refuses to respond to Bilaam, Bilaam grows angrier and angrier. The donkey is able to see an Angel of God in the road and Bilaam the soothsayer cannot. So a humorous conversation between Donkey and Soothsayer occurs (this is the funny part). Bilaam eventually realizes that he is unable to curse Bnai Yisroel. Finally when he is looking from the hills down upon Bnai Yisroel and sees a peaceful, God-fearing community he utters praise instead of curses.  Imagine Balak’s anger and frustration? He hires Bilaam to curse B’nai Yisroel, and instead he blesses Bnai Yisroel! Vayomer Balak El Bilaam Meh Asita Li Lakov Oyvai L’Kachticha V’Hinei Beirachta Vareich – Balak said to Bilaam, “What have you done to me! To curse my enemy have I brought you – but behold, you have even blessed!” (Num. 23:11)

Balak’s frustration is something we can all understand. He believed that Bilaam, a powerful soothsayer/prophet was capable of communing with God and deriving the appropriate sign in order to curse Bnai Yisroel. Bilaam’s response is quite revealing: Halo Eit Asher Yasim HaShem B’Fi Oto Eshmor L’Daber! Is it not so that whatever Hashem puts in my mouth, that I must take heed to speak! Essentially Bilaam explains that he can only say what God would have said. Clearly With his plans stymied, Balak leaves Bilaam in great frustration. If Balak could have traded Bilaam for another soothsayer, he probably would have. As awful a person as Balak is, and as mercenary a person Bilaam is, we can learn a lot from the exchange of both men.  Balak hired the soothsayer to do a job for which Bilaam was renowned for doing. Bilaam did not live up to his reputation.  Had Balak issued a curse himself, even if it failed, at least he would have felt empowered. Remember, Balak is afraid. He knows of Bnai Yisroel’s reputation.  He doesn’t stand a chance in a conventional confrontation. If Balak had been educated and was knowledgeable in the arts of “curse issuing”, then Balak’s frustration would have been directed at God and himself.

While it may be easy to trade players who have not lived up to expectations; it is much harder for Balak to trade Bilaam. For that matter, it’s also really hard to trade ourselves. What do we do when we fail to live up to our own expectations? Do we blame others or do we engage in a bit of introspection and try to improve ourselves?  By turning inwards, by examining our souls, we derive the impetus to ask questions, to learn, and to make Judaism more meaningful. Sometimes, a team will decide not get rid of a player whom they think is underachieving. Rather than look for another player –looking outwards; teams decide to stick with the personnel that they have, to re-affirm their confidence in the player, and give the player more opportunity to play. The result is that both the ownership and the player look inward and renew the sense of commitment and purpose.

                Peace,                   

                Rav Yitz